[petsc-users] Doubt about mesh size distribution in DMDACreate3d using periodic boundary conditions

Wed Nov 20 16:40:26 CST 2024

I see… that might be the problem. I’ll check it tomorrow. Thank you!

Miguel

On 20 Nov 2024, at 22:57, Barry Smith <bsmith at petsc.dev> wrote:

On Nov 20, 2024, at 2:38 PM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmolinos at us.es> wrote:

Yes, I use the vertex (nodes) of the elements.

   Then the length between each vertex will be different between periodic and non-periodic case. With 10 points and non-periodic, it will be 1/9, and with periodic it will be 1/10th. Is this what you are asking about?

I am using the DMDA as an auxiliar mesh to do the domain partitioning in the DMSWARM.

Thanks,
Miguel

On 20 Nov 2024, at 19:54, Barry Smith <bsmith at petsc.dev> wrote:

   Are you considering your degrees of freedom as vertex or cell-centered?

   Say three "elements" per edge.

       If vertex centered then discretization size is 1/3 if periodic and 1/2 if not periodic

       If cell-centered then each cell has width 1/3 for both periodic and not periodic

    but in both cases you can think of the discretization size as constant along the whole cube edge.

    Is this related to DMSWARM in particular?

On Nov 20, 2024, at 12:56 PM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmolinos at us.es> wrote:

I mean that if the dimensions of the cube are 1x1x1 (for example). And I want 10 elements per edge, the discretization size must be 0.1 constant over the whole cube edge.

This is not in the code, I just impose the number of elements per edge.

Thank you,
Miguel

On 20 Nov 2024, at 18:52, Barry Smith <bsmith at petsc.dev> wrote:

  What do you mean by discretization size, and how do I see it in the code?

  Barry

On Nov 20, 2024, at 12:48 PM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmolinos at us.es> wrote:

Sorry, I meant that the discretisation size is not constant across the edges of the cube.

Miguel

On 20 Nov 2024, at 18:36, Barry Smith <bsmith at petsc.dev> wrote:

   I am sorry, I don't understand the problem. When I run by default with -da_view I get

Processor [0] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 0 2
Processor [1] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 2 3, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 0 2
Processor [2] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 2 3, Z range of indices: 0 2
Processor [3] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 2 3, Y range of indices: 2 3, Z range of indices: 0 2
Processor [4] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 2 3
Processor [5] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 2 3, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 2 3
Processor [6] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 2 3, Z range of indices: 2 3
Processor [7] M 3 N 3 P 3 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 2 3, Y range of indices: 2 3, Z range of indices: 2 3

which seems right because you are trying to have three cells in each direction. The distribution has to be uneven, hence 0 2 and 2 3

When I change the code to use ndiv_mesh_* = 4 and run with periodic or not I get

$ PETSC_OPTIONS="" mpiexec -n 8 ./atoms-3D -dm_view
DM Object: 8 MPI processes
  type: da
Processor [0] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 0 2
Processor [1] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 2 4, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 0 2
Processor [2] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 2 4, Z range of indices: 0 2
Processor [3] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 2 4, Y range of indices: 2 4, Z range of indices: 0 2
Processor [4] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 2 4
Processor [5] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 2 4, Y range of indices: 0 2, Z range of indices: 2 4
Processor [6] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 0 2, Y range of indices: 2 4, Z range of indices: 2 4
Processor [7] M 4 N 4 P 4 m 2 n 2 p 2 w 1 s 1
X range of indices: 2 4, Y range of indices: 2 4, Z range of indices: 2 4

so it is splitting as expected each rank gets a 2 by 2 by 2 set of indices.

Could you please let me know what the problem is that I should be seeing.

  Barry

On Nov 20, 2024, at 7:06 AM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmolinos at us.es> wrote:

Dear Barry,

Please, find attached to this email a minimal example of the problem. Run it using 8 MPI processes.

Thanks,
Miguel

On 20 Nov 2024, at 11:48, Miguel Molinos <mmolinos at us.es> wrote:

Hi Bary:

I will check the example you suggest. Anyhow, I’ll send a reproducible example ASAP.

Thanks,
Miguel

On 19 Nov 2024, at 18:55, Barry Smith <bsmith at petsc.dev> wrote:

   I modify src/dm/tests/ex25.c and always see a nice even split when possible with both DM_BOUNDARY_NONE and DM_BOUNDARY_PERIODIC

    Can you please send a reproducible example?

    Thanks

     Barry

On Nov 19, 2024, at 6:14 AM, MIGUEL MOLINOS PEREZ <mmolinos at us.es> wrote:

Dear all:

It seems that if I mesh a cubic domain with “DMDACreate3d” using 8 bricks for discretization and with periodic boundaries, each of the bricks has a different size. In contrast, if I use DM_BOUNDARY_NONE, all 8 bricks have the same size.

I have used this together with the DMSWarm discretization. And as you can see the number of particles per rank is not evenly distributed:
210 420 366 732 420 840 732 1464

Am I missing something?

Thanks,
Miguel

<Screenshot 2024-11-19 at 10.56.36.png>

<atoms-3D.cpp><Mg-hcp-cube-x17-x10-x10.dump>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20241120/36e00a90/attachment-0001.html>